HA!  More hypocrisy from Swamp.

Your hyping on zoning is based on either you not understanding what it is, or you assuming that it sounds good and most people do not know what zoning is. The reason there isnt a small market on the corner of my street isnt based on zoning. It is based on he couldnt survive. The 7-11 I pass every day can do it better and cheaper. If someone wanted to put up a store in a subdivision and the people who lived there wanted it they could apply for a variance and put up a store. 

I think this paragraph alone proves that you have no idea what the zoning argument is about.  Wether an entrepreneur could build a successful business on the corner of your residential neighborhood or not is a question that the entrepreneur must decide.  Government zoning laws take that choice out of the entrepreneur's hands.  Even if they apply for rezoning of that land, there are municipal fees (1500.00 in Warren plus an additional 500.00 deposit for a rezoning sign) and legal fees that make starting a business that much riskier.  This is a free market principle?

Zoning is not about forcing people to live in the way the government wants. It is about maximizing value. Keeping shops and apartments out of residential areas makes the area more attractive and more valuable. Do you think Condo boards and all their tyranical rules are based on anything than the interest of the owners overall?

So you want the government to insure the value of your home?  Are you sure you're not a raving socialist?  If you want to insure the value of your home, buy home equity insurance.  That is the free market solution, not municipal zoning.  If you want to keep commercial development or apartment complexes out of your neighborhood, then start a property association.  

Posted by creilmann on 1/3/2011 12:52:00 PM (view original):

Your hyping on zoning is based on either you not understanding what it is, or you assuming that it sounds good and most people do not know what zoning is. The reason there isnt a small market on the corner of my street isnt based on zoning. It is based on he couldnt survive. The 7-11 I pass every day can do it better and cheaper. If someone wanted to put up a store in a subdivision and the people who lived there wanted it they could apply for a variance and put up a store. 

I think this paragraph alone proves that you have no idea what the zoning argument is about.  Wether an entrepreneur could build a successful business on the corner of your residential neighborhood or not is a question that the entrepreneur must decide.  Government zoning laws take that choice out of the entrepreneur's hands.  Even if they apply for rezoning of that land, there are municipal fees (1500.00 in Warren plus an additional 500.00 deposit for a rezoning sign) and legal fees that make starting a business that much riskier.  This is a free market principle?

Zoning is not about forcing people to live in the way the government wants. It is about maximizing value. Keeping shops and apartments out of residential areas makes the area more attractive and more valuable. Do you think Condo boards and all their tyranical rules are based on anything than the interest of the owners overall?

So you want the government to insure the value of your home?  Are you sure you're not a raving socialist?  If you want to insure the value of your home, buy home equity insurance.  That is the free market solution, not municipal zoning.  If you want to keep commercial development or apartment complexes out of your neighborhood, then start a property association.  

I want limited Government and we dont have it. I admit that freely.

You are trying to tie the fact that we dont have a limited government to proof that the suburbs were created doesnt fly.

The government is in almost every aspect of our life. that does not prove that the suburbs were forced on us.

Again you refuse the final question. If the suburbs were really forced on us...who and why?

Posted by creilmann on 1/3/2011 10:28:00 AM (view original):
As usual, I've come to the point in our debate where I realize that this has all been pointless (cue Anton).  You don't even know the concept of one of the principals you claim to hold so dear.  The little bit of it that you do understand is pushed aside when it comes to a commodity that benefits you.  You are the worst of hypocrites.  

We come to the point where your liberal dogma forces you to look at the available data and come to a conclusion that is not based on the facts.

Since I refuse to accept your conclusion I must be stupid. There cannot be another explaination!

I responded to every point you offered. You cannot even answer the central question to my argument. If this was a creation who did it and why. That is central because it cannot be answered. 

 You lose!

Posted by swamphawk22 on 1/3/2011 5:42:00 PM (view original):

Posted by creilmann on 1/3/2011 12:52:00 PM (view original):

Your hyping on zoning is based on either you not understanding what it is, or you assuming that it sounds good and most people do not know what zoning is. The reason there isnt a small market on the corner of my street isnt based on zoning. It is based on he couldnt survive. The 7-11 I pass every day can do it better and cheaper. If someone wanted to put up a store in a subdivision and the people who lived there wanted it they could apply for a variance and put up a store. 

I think this paragraph alone proves that you have no idea what the zoning argument is about.  Wether an entrepreneur could build a successful business on the corner of your residential neighborhood or not is a question that the entrepreneur must decide.  Government zoning laws take that choice out of the entrepreneur's hands.  Even if they apply for rezoning of that land, there are municipal fees (1500.00 in Warren plus an additional 500.00 deposit for a rezoning sign) and legal fees that make starting a business that much riskier.  This is a free market principle?

Zoning is not about forcing people to live in the way the government wants. It is about maximizing value. Keeping shops and apartments out of residential areas makes the area more attractive and more valuable. Do you think Condo boards and all their tyranical rules are based on anything than the interest of the owners overall?

So you want the government to insure the value of your home?  Are you sure you're not a raving socialist?  If you want to insure the value of your home, buy home equity insurance.  That is the free market solution, not municipal zoning.  If you want to keep commercial development or apartment complexes out of your neighborhood, then start a property association.  

I want limited Government and we dont have it. I admit that freely.

You are trying to tie the fact that we dont have a limited government to proof that the suburbs were created doesnt fly.

The government is in almost every aspect of our life. that does not prove that the suburbs were forced on us.

Again you refuse the final question. If the suburbs were really forced on us...who and why?

Translation: I'm in over my head here so I'm just going to say that you're wrong, despite all the facts you've presented, and move on.

No. Your facts do not support your argument at all.

What is the proof that there is a connection between your facts and a created suburbia? There is none.

Again if this was a concious act to spread suburbs...Who and why?

The reason this is key is because the facts about taxes, zoning and roads could not have been a concious act. The people who did them were all unrealated with completly different motives.

Suburbs occured because people wanted them.

The topic is wether or not it was a result of the free market.  I have given you numerous reasons as to why it is not.  You focused on zoning so I gave more detail.  You are defending the government's ability to control private property.  That is not a free market principle.

Since the Government is in just about everything than nothing that happens in America is free market by your standard. Wall Mart, Micrsoft, Ben and jerrys...nothing!

You claimed that it was created and I claimed it happened.

The facts cannot support a concious act.

If you want me to admit that since the Government is too big and has an impact on every aspect of our lives that it did help the suburbs occur than yes I will admit that.

They would have occured irregardless.

Without all of those subsidies and restrictions, suburban life would be unaffordable to the middle-class.  The suburbs are what they are today because taxpayers have subsidized them.  

And where exactly would they have lived?

Suburbs were what people wanted. The movie "Its a wonderful life" is about people wanting to get out of Potters city and into Baileys suburb. This was long before any Federal Support.

It's A Wonderful Life????  Are you f**king kidding me?

It is a classic movie. It is about people moving from high density cities to the suburbs.

This is my proof that this is what people want. Everyone on that movie wanted to live in a suburban style ranch house.

Posted by creilmann on 1/3/2011 6:30:00 PM (view original):
It's A Wonderful Life????  Are you f**king kidding me?

Of course Bedford Falls, being a teeming metropolis of hundreds if not thousands, had suburbs.

Posted by antonsirius on 1/3/2011 10:20:00 PM (view original):

Posted by creilmann on 1/3/2011 6:30:00 PM (view original):
It's A Wonderful Life????  Are you f**king kidding me?

Of course Bedford Falls, being a teeming metropolis of hundreds if not thousands, had suburbs.

And even there people wanted to move to the suburbs from the city.

This is almost instictive, like salmons spawning.

People want to own a piece of property.